Arjun Verma @ Arjun v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Court No. - 11 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13230 of 2024 Applicant :- Arjun Verma @ Arjun Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.

¶1Heard Sri Sanjay Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Ashok Kumar Singh, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.

¶2As per learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant is languishing in jail since 23.05.2024 in Case Crime No.334/2024, under Section 304 I.P.C., Police Station P.G.I., District Lucknow.

¶3Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the present applicant has falsely been implicated in this case as he has not committed any offence as alleged in the prosecution story. Attention has been drawn towards impugned F.I.R., wherein the date of incident has been indicated 18.05.2024 but the F.I.R. has been lodged on 22.05.2024 without explaining aforesaid inordinate delay. In the aforesaid F.I.R. there are two accused persons. There is no specific allegation against the present applicant and as per prosecution story the present applicant along with co-accused were with the deceased person in an intoxication condition before the death of the deceased. The impugned F.I.R. has been lodged on the basis of suspicion, as there is no eye witness account in the present case therefore, he may be enlarged on bail. The present applicant has no previous criminal history and the charge sheet has been submitted in the case.

¶4Learned counsel for the applicant has undertaken on behalf of the present applicant that the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail, if so granted by this Court and shall abide by all terms and conditions of the bail order and shall cooperate with the trial proceedings.

¶5Learned Additional Government Advocate has, however, opposed the prayer for bail but he has not disputed the aforesaid submission of learned counsel for the applicant.

¶6Therefore, without entering into the merits of the issue and considering the fact that there is no specific allegation against the applicant and the impugned F.I.R. has been lodged on the basis of suspicion, as there is no eye witness of the alleged incident and considering the undertaking of the applicant that he shall co-operate in the trial proceedings and shall not misuse the liberty of the bail and, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶7Let the applicant-Arjun Verma @ Arjun be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions :-

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of the B.N.S., 2023.

(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 84 of B.N.S.S., 2023 is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 208 of the B.N.S., 2023.

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of B.N.S.S., 2023. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. (Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J) Order Date :- 20.12.2024 Arvind High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench